First of by security I meant safety, second I have lost data using ext2, ext3, and XFS so your never really safe. I have yet to experience any data corruption with ReiserFS but I haven't used it for very long either._________________This message self destructed a long time ago.

Ask six different linux users what file types you should use and you'll get six different answers. A lot of it is very subjective and dependent on your particular needs. (i.e. speed vs. stability vs. simplicity)

Try them all out -- see which one floats your boat the best.

--kurt

I haven't lost any data with ext3 and I've been using it for quite a long time. I also don't really notice any speed difference between that and reiser and xfs, although I haven't used xfs all that much. The people to ask are sys admins who have to handle a bunch of file servers 'n' stuff. I am not one of those, so take my file system recommendation with a grain of salt. Really, take anyone's with a grain of salt. You should probably just try out the ones you are considering and decide on your own._________________if i never try anything, i never learn anything..
if i never take a risk, i stay where i am..

Hei
I use 'w3m' text browser and is cool, better that lynx ?!
How the hel I can go to other URL?
In lynx i was pressed 'g' and enter new url
How it goes here?_________________All for one and one for All
--

I'm using XFS but I had tried reiserfs before I had started with gentoo. I haven't experienced any problem with thoses one. I think that the next time I have to chose a filesystem, I will go again for ReiserFS. It seems to help a lot for "updatedb" and "find", but thats the only difference I can notice in a normal usage. maybe Reiserfs can help a little in compilations because packages sources often use small .c and .h files (but CPU and buffer memory is probably more important).

The gentoo install guid is IMHO a little to aggressive with ReiserFS. There are storys about data corruption on every filesystem, and I'm not sure ReiserFS is worst than the others. <troll> Did the author of the gentoo install docs personnaly experienced problem with ReiserFS ? </troll>

Maybe the install documentation could be updated to be a little more objective.

Users can set aside a partition for testing (not the production one), and have it beaten to death

File systems are evolving all the time, and people having crashes with a fs (not matter which one) long time ago, will surely find the situation different today, and I'm one's favoriate fs is another's nightmare.

Feel free to experiment (this is the fun part with open source) _________________There's someone in my head but it's not me - Pink Floyd

When the install docs were written ReiserFS was younger than it is now, for some reason I believe it still says the same thing but you can fully ignore not using ReiserFS because of corruption IMO.

Daniel Robbins knows what he is talking about when it comes to filesystems, and if he says ReiserFS is a bad choice *now* I would listen but I don't think he would say it anymore._________________This message self destructed a long time ago.